Influence of Subclinical Neck Pain on the Ability to Perform a Mental Rotation Task: A 4-Week Longitudinal Study With a Healthy Control Group Comparison
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Mental rotation of objects and the frame of reference of those objects are critical for executing correct and skillful movements and are important for object recognition, spatial navigation, and movement planning. The purpose of this longitudinal study was to compare the mental rotation ability of those with subclinical neck pain (SCNP) to healthy controls at baseline and after 4 weeks. METHODS: Twenty-six volunteers (13 SCNP and 12 healthy controls) were recruited from a university student population. Subclinical neck pain participants had scores of mild to moderate on the Chronic Pain Grade Scale, and controls had minimal or no pain. For the mental rotation task, participants were presented with an object (letter "R") on a computer screen presented randomly in either normal or backwards parity at various orientations (0°, 45°, 90°, 135°, 180°, 225°, 270°, and 315°). Participants indicated the object's parity by pressing "N" for normal or "B" for backwards. Each orientation for normal and backward parities was presented 5 times, and the average response time for all letter presentations was calculated for each participant, at baseline and 4 weeks later. RESULTS: Both groups had overall improved response times from baseline to 4 weeks. Healthy participants had significantly improved response times compared to SCNP, both at baseline (P < .05) and 4 weeks (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Healthy participants performed better than the SCNP group at both time points. Subclinical neck pain may impair the ability to perform a complex mental rotation task involving cerebellar connections, possibly due to altered body schema.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".